| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| reconsideration of claim |
new facts |
definition |
|
Summary:
Letter submitted subsequent to Board's decision tending to show that settlement monies were paid as discrimination damages, not for loss of salary. An Umpire cannot receive new evidence going to the merits of a claim. Furthermore, this evidence is not analogous to "new facts" under s. 86.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
awards |
nature of monies |
|
Summary:
Letter submitted subsequent to Board's decision tending to show that settlement monies were paid as discrimination damages. The letter falls short of enabling a trier of fact acting judicially to determine that the settlement amount was for anything other than compensation for loss of employment.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
evidence new |
|
Summary:
TAYLOR held that an Umpire on an appeal from a decision of the Board cannot receive new evidence going to the merits of a claim unless such evidence was sought to be adduced in the proceedings before the Board and was improperly excluded. The latter exception does not apply in the present case.
